Evidence of meeting #67 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was museums.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Who brands? The naming of the museum is found in the Museums Act. Branding of specific exhibits is up to the museum.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But in this particular case, certainly there's a great deal of scepticism even in some of the language that's out here. It's a lot smaller than it used to be. In the new language there is “knowledge and understanding” as opposed to what was there before, which was “knowledge and critical understanding”. Some people may look at that as just a small item, but these are words that carry a lot of weight. A critical understanding in and of itself carries a certain degree of independence. I would like to see a three-year review about our museums, about the independence, and about whether this independence is maintained.
I'm sorry if I sound alarmist, but, number one, the committee in a report recommended—all of us recommended—that for the celebrations of 2017 we would set up an arm's-length organization to do this. Already we are now into this exercise, which is also branded as a celebration of 2017, to rename the museum and to produce the artifacts across the country or share them, which I'm fine with. But the branding that you're doing is..... Your department has done it before to an excessive degree. We did an order paper question just a short time ago, and you rebranded what was always the “Government of Canada” so that now most of the releases contain the words “Harper Government” as a rebranding exercise. From June 28, 2011 to March 2, 2013 government departments put out a total of 2,600 releases containing the term “Harper Government”. The number one department was yours by far, by 600 releases. That's a quarter of the total. So, that's your branding exercise. I hope this is not what we're seeing here, which would actually infringe upon the curatorial independence of this organization.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
That's quite a stretch, Scott. You're comparing apples....
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
You're talking about the Department of Canadian Heritage versus a museum. I don't run the museum, and I don't send out any press releases from the museum. The museum sends out all of its own press releases. You understand the difference, right? The museum is not a part of the Department of Canadian Heritage. The museum is its own independent entity created by the Museums Act and protected by the Museums Act from me or you or anybody telling them what they can or can't say. Tell me you understand the difference between the museum sending out a press release and me sending out a press release.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But you have the appointees on the board itself. You now decide on the board. You've laid out here, in the terms you have, how you want to see this museum. You are changing the name, yes, but in effect you're also changing the function of this, which really can be dictated by you if you look at the language of this.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
The only change is the mandate that is spelled out in Bill C-49, and if you want to change one of the words in there because it will provide you greater comfort, then I'm prepared to see that. But you haven't told me. You've talked, but you've never said anything about a specific amendment. If you want to put pen to paper, I'll be glad to look at it, Scott. As I said to you, we want to work together on this.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Well, I'll have to wait until we get to that.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
That's fine. That's great, and we'll take a look at that. If that will provide you greater comfort, that's fine. On the first thing that you said here about a three-year review of the independence, it's the law. The law is pretty clear. Do you not think the Museums Act is clear about the independence of our museums?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
You did it for the Copyright Act. Why did you do it for Bill C-11, the Copyright Act? You have a review built in....
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
We have a five-year review of the Copyright Act for very different reasons, because technological changes over years and international obligations by the Government of Canada shouldn't stop us from reforming our copyright legislation—so it's about technology and international obligations. There's nothing technologically that changes about the Government of Canada having a wall of independence motivating the museums—
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Well, of course there is. We share the artifacts across the country. You even said yourself earlier that because of technological changes, some of the changes have to be made no matter what. That's certainly true in this particular case and when it comes to the museum.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
I'm not following you on the technology....
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
The fundamental reason for you to have a review is to make sure that your legislation is working. Correct? So, why not do a three-year review of this?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
You mean on this particular museum or on all museums?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Sure. If Canadians have a fundamental concern about the independence of this museum and perhaps even about other museums, wouldn't a three-year review alleviate that problem?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
If you want, but this is a new policy. Let's be very clear. This is the first time that any member of this Parliament has ever raised this issue. But let's look specifically at the law. Section 27 of the Museums Act says:
No directive shall be given to a museum...with respect to cultural activities, including...its activities and programs for the public, including exhibitions, displays and publications...and...research.
It's pretty clear.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Because it doesn't change, Scott. It's the law. Words don't jump off the page and jump over each other. It's the law.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But in other cases, you have put a review board in, such as for Bill C-11.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Okay, but it sounds to me like you don't want to do this.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
I don't care. If you want to do it, do it, but it's the law. It doesn't change.